Improvement in boot and shoe-trees



PA'rnN'r OFFICE.

THOMAS E. EVANS, PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA.

IMPROVEMENT IN BOOT AND SHOE-TREES.

Specification forming part of Letters Patent N o. 119,131, dated September 19,1871.

To all whom it may concern:

Be it known that I, THoMAs R. EvANs, of Philadelphia, county of Philadelphia, State of Penns'ylvania, have invented an Improved Revolving ShoeTree, of whichthe followingis a speoication:

My invention relates to an improvement in the revolving shoe-tree for which Letters latentwere granted to me on the 27th day of April, A. D.

1869, and the improvement consists of a hinged arm or lever, having a projection or projections adapted to notches on the edge of a wheel secured to the spindle of the shoe-tree, as fully described hereafter; the said lever being more readily operated and being less liable to break than the spring-pawl described in my aforesaid patent:

Figure l is a perspective view of my improved revolving shoe-tree, and Fig. 2 a sectional plan view of one end of the saine.

A represents a horizontal spindle, arranged to turn in a'tubular bearing, a, formed on the upper portion of a metal bracket, B, which is secured to the edge of a table or bench, X, as indicated by dotted lines. The shoe-tree Fconsists of a leg piece, b, and toe piece b', and is secured to a disk, j', at the front end of the spindle A by screws 7L h, a stem, z', (or continuation of the spindle,) being driven into an opening in the said shoe-tree and relieving the strain nponthe screws. To the rear end of the spindle A is secured a disk or wheel, G, on the edge of which, at regular distances apart, are formed notches k, adapted 'for the reception of a projection, l, on the under edge of a curved arm or lever, H, hung to a lug, m, of the bracket B and overhanging the said wheel Gr, with which it is maintained in contact by its own weight.

This lever H is intended as a substitute for the spring-pawl described in my aforesaid patent of April 27th, A. D. 1869, the objections to which were its liability to snap whe'n drawn back from the wheel, and the fact that a strong effort was required to hold it back whenever the shoe-tree and wheel had to be turned. The projection Zof the lever retains the wheel and shoe-tree in any given position just as etfectually and rigidly as did the spring-pawl, and when the wheel has to be turned in order to change the position of the shoe-tree the lever can be merely lifted so as to withdraw its projection from the notch in the wheel, or it can be thrown entirely over and out of the way.

The lever is also much more convenient than the spring-pawl when the device has to be taken apart-as, for instance, in removing the wheel or shoe-tree-as it can be thrown back and will not require to be held as would the spring-pawl.

The lever might be provided with two or more projections, l, but one will in most cases be found sufticient.

I claim- The combination, in a revolving shoe-tree, of the notched wheel G and a lever, H, having a projection adapted to notches in the wheel and hung adjacent to the wheel, as described, so that f it can be brought against the latter or turned back and retained free from contact therewith, for the purpose set forth.

In testimony whereof I have signed my name to this specification in the presence of ytwo subscribing witnesses. THOS. R. EVANS.

Witnesses:

WM. A. STEEL,

HARRY SMITH. (13.) 

